What's new

US automaker bailout poll

Should the US bail these ungrateful automakers out?

  • Too bad, let them sink!

  • Blindly hand over 25 billion

  • Provide limited assistance in other ways.


Results are only viewable after voting.
They know they can't plod along. Nor can they change without help. I simply cannot see how it is in the best interest of the US economy to allow hundreds thousands of auto industry workers and millions of other American workers who will as a direct effect of those lost jobs lose their's in turn. This is the type of event that could quickly turn a period of recession into a full blown depression and that would affect each and every one of us.

But what indication is there at all that $25 billion dollars is going to make any difference other than delay the inevitable a few months and waste much more taxpayer money in the process?

These guys have no ideas whatsoever, it's brutally clear. They just want to survive a little longer.
 
Dear thread,

Please die a horrible, painful death and soon.

Sincerely,

Actually, this one's not that bad of a thread, in my opinion. We've managed to keep it quite civil and even shown some respect for others' opinions (up until this post -- I make no claim for anything that may or may not be posted after this one :biggrin:)

Not all touchy subject matter has to be shut down and stopped.
 
Hoo boy. A lot to talk about in here.

What you said!! I heard someone on the news talking about giving each American adult 100k, instead of handing over 25 billion to them and that sounded pretty good! Provided, that you must buy an american car with it. Now that would help save their jobs. I have heard so many stories about the auto workers that makes me mad! They get paid huge amounts of money and they give it to five workers where one is needed because the union will not allow them to change the rules!

If help comes, get rid of the union!!! $30 an hour to sweep floors!! Pure crap!!
This is not even close to true anymore. Early in the year (and in years previous) workers who had high scale pay seniority were given early retirement buyouts, which most of them took, expressly so that GM could hire in new workers at rates comparable to the rest of the industry. New line workers make $11-14/hr, and they don't see anything close to the benefit packages that were available in the past.

Sadly I feel that we need to allow them to sink or swim on their own. They made their beds with chooseing gasaholic platforms dspite the knowlage that fuel prices would eventually rise. However, it is a two fold problem. The unions are to blaim at least a little bit. I say that as a union locomotive engineer, but greed all the way around has brought down more than one great company, i.e. International Harvester. The unions should go to their members and say hey, we are faceing a crisis like no other, give some up in order to save what we can and in time build it back up when the company is on firm footing again. I would rather have a decent job then no job at all...
The unions have made many concessions, honestly the unions aren't the problem that people make them out to be. There's no arguing that the domestic automakers haven't made big mistakes in the past, and are paying for them, but much has been done to turn that around. A bigger problem for GM for example is they have 11-something brands and dealerships that's spread them too thin.

what is wrong with filing bankrupt? They've all got assets and products that are useful to the marketplace? Why wouldn't another manufacturer like say Audi be interested in GM or Chrysler? I can't recall the last time I bought anything from these folks anyway.

GM, Ford, and Chrysler are not industry representatives that are key to national defense like steel, the railroads, or the airlines. So I say, let them file like any other company would have to if it failed as a business.

I'm pretty much apposed to any bailout coming out of my pocket that is not directly tied to homeowner relief and mortgage relief.
If the auto companies fail, the fallout is going to hit your pocket anyway. If Washington and the big 3 can figure out a viable loan to tide them over, the government can pay $25 million to keep them from bankruptcy or it can pay $100 million in lost tax revenue and unemployment insurance filing.

...

In short, letting the US makers fail would be good for the economy, not bad. This would be the case whether they close their doors completely or emerge from bankruptcy as one or more companies who can succeed in making cars that will sell. Either way, consumer wants will be better satisfied and everyone will be wealthier as a result.
The auto companies aren't going to "emerge" from bankruptcy successfully. No one is going to buy a car from a bankrupt company. Look at the reputation domestic cars have already as being inferior to foreign cars, even though a quick glance at any JD Power & Associates survey will tell you the quality is evenly distributed.

Let 'em sink. A bailout prolongs the inevitable. What is the worst that can happen? Union guys get paid a wage similar to Toyota workers? Poor dears. With all the infrastructure required to make cars in place, new management could come in and breath new life into the American automobile industry.
The worst that will happen is that it will be catastrophic for the American economy, which it would be. If GM folds that's 300 thousand jobs gone. Include in that number the dealerships, part suppliers, secondary manufacturers, repair sites, any of the millions of jobs dependent on the continued existence of GM. If that infrastructure falls apart, Ford and Chrylser go with them. This isn't just 3 little companies you're talking about torpedoing, all of Michigan's economy is completely dependent on these companies. It would decimate the state, whose unemployment is already beyond 9%, and it would be the death-knell for Ohio and Indiana as well.

Leave the free market alone. Otherwise is socialism. No money to anybody.
Our system of government already incorporates some socialistic standards, see: medicare. We do not live in a pure laissez-faire economy, and for good reason. If it were so, the economic disparity between the rich executives and the poorer working class would be exponentially larger.

Outside of several one-time charges that were spent on restructuring efforts, GM was profitable last year. If not for the current monumental economic crisis we've been facing, I have no doubt GM would be turning a profit this year as well. Many of the things posters here have been suggesting the Big 3 need to do to be profitable were implemented by GM during their last contract negotiations. A larger share of healthcare costs was shifted onto the workers. Retirement pay is now managed by a union run trust fund. Perks such as tuition reimbursement are being phased out. A two-tier wage system was implemented to control labor costs. GM knew they had to change the way they did business to stay afloat, made the changes, and then had the misfortune to be hit by a global economic crisis before the positive effects of said changes could be realized.

The concept of re-tooling has been thrown around a lot here as well. GM also has already begun to tackle this problem. My father is employed at a plant in Lansing, MI that was opened in 2006. This state-of-the-art plant was designed so that it can be reconfigured to build any type of vehicle on the fly.

A lot of you are also saying we shouldn’t keep these companies afloat because nobody even wants to buy American automobiles anymore. This is just ridiculous and untrue. While their market share is definitely dwindling, the Big 3 are still in the top four in market share. Also, while everyone’s sales, even the foreign manufacturers, are declining as a result of the economy, sales at my father’s plant (which produces the Acadia, Outlook, and Enclave) actually increased in September!

I’ve also seen a lot of complaints about the Big 3’s lack of fuel-efficient vehicles. While none of their vehicles can match the fuel efficiency of foreign hybrids, GM does offer the most vehicles that get over 30 MPG than any other company with 17 models. Ford has hybrids on the market and is on the verge of releasing a hybrid F-150 pickup truck that gets 60 MPG, better than a Prius. GM will be releasing two fully electric plug-in vehicles in 2010 and 2011 if the company survives until then. GM also operates a fleet of 300 hydrogen fuel cell powered buses used for public transportation in 18 cities across the globe. The fuel cells currently cost about $150,000 to produce. Once they can get production costs down to around $5000, they’re going to start putting them in vehicles you and I can buy. It would be a shame if the company failed before that could happen.
Quotin' dis because this guy knows his stuff.

Let'em sink. They deserve it. The employees can find another job. Let capitalism work.
...
Again, MI's unemployment rate is over 9% (the rest of the country is around 6.5%), and Michigan basically has no other industry besides the automakers. If they become destitute so does the entire state. The laid off workers won't "find another job", there won't be other jobs to be had. You're talking economic misery on a massive scale, and to just say "screw them" is to either be ignorant of the consequences or be extraordinarily callous. But even if you look at it aside from a moral issue, the further decline of the economy and the burden such a loss in revenue + unemployment insurance this will put on the government will effect the entire American economy, not just Michigan, and not just the automotive executives.



I don't like the premise of bailing out the big three either, but realistically, assuming the details and logistics can be worked out to where things are equitable between the companies and Washington, we can give them a loan so they can survive the current fallout created by the banking system abandoning sane loaning practices, or we can pay more money covering the fallout their demise would eschew.


I'd also like to throw in some interesting words of an engineer from MI.
http://www.freep.com/article/20081117/COL14/811170379

Interesting read about the big 3.

Anyways, I've worked directly for a major tier 1 supplier to all auto companies, big 3 and others. The last 10 years have seen major changes in the auto industry. The logistics of trying to build 5 million + vehicles a year is pretty massive. They have been shedding jobs like crazy and making innovative changes in manufacturing (there's some plant somewhere that houses like 4 suppliers and the vehicle assembly in one building to cut shipping and handling costs out). Trust me, they are trying. Foreign competition has mandated it. The foreign competition is a good thing, and I think the big 3 are responding well to it. They have years of bad practices to overcome and pay for, and in the face of waining consumer demand, they just might not make it.

In the meantime, the banks take on absolutely mind numbing retarted practices of loaning half a million to anyone with a pulse, and they get $700 billion to help pay for those mistakes. All the big 3 want is a fraction of that to help them through a very tough economic time that the banks had a major hand in creating. I'm pretty sure the auto companies don't need to be told by the government what they need to do to become profitable again. They know and are working damn hard towards it. Are they perfect? no. But they can and will get there, one way or another.

quick edit: What I also wanted to point out is think of unemployment as a short term government "bailout" to a citizen who lost their job and the economic backlash of someone losing a job (defaulting on all loans, going hungry, etc...) is worse than paying them for a while. I see the same thing for the big 3. They want $25 billion, and it could cost the Country $100 billion if they don't survive. Realistically they will survive in some capacity, but at this point something will happen, and that something will cost taxpayers money one way or another.
 
arcman and trench know what they're talking about. And the UAW has been making concessions to help the industry for decades. They're not the ones who decided to sell Hummers while Toyota and Honda were developing cars that run prune juice and air.
 
arcman and trench know what they're talking about. And the UAW has been making concessions to help the industry for decades. They're not the ones who decided to sell Hummers while Toyota and Honda were developing cars that run prune juice and air.

I agree. This is exactly what I was trying to stress earlier. All isn't what it appears on the surface. Don't take out the frustration with the stupid banking industry and Wall Street on a domestic industry doing all they can to try to quickly adapt to the situation thrust upon them.
 
We can't let them sink because too many UAW members would be out of work. Where I live its really the last big industry left. I say give them help but impose something like a control board to be sure they use the money wisely.
 
Dead on right with that post, Slagle!

Thanks. I don't think many people realize just how big it would be if the big three were no more. I don't disagree that they need to step up and make more fuel efficient vehicles, but we already import so much. If we lose the Big 3, then what's next Apple Pie and Baseball?

This isn't about unions or the workers. This is about poor choices at the tops of these companies. The "Bailout" is really a loan and they will have to pay it back. Hopefully the three of them can step up, make more environmentally friendly and economical vehicles.

Hell, I'd rather see a corporate merger of the big three than see any one of them gone.
 
The amount of support for pure Socialism in this thread is astounding. I thought things were touchy before, but if people are really advocating Government intervention and control for any industry deemed "too big" to fold or go bankrupt, then I guess we're not that far off from Socialism as I thought we were.

This is actually pretty amazing. So let's go ahead and put together a list of companies or industries that really are untouchable, can't screw up bad enough, and can basically do whatever they want without fear of Market fallout or going out of business.

Banks
Auto companies (big 3)
Managed Health Care companies?
Television/Satellite companies?
Internet Service Providers?
Wal Mart?

Where does it stop?
 
GM was drifting towards death any way. The recession is only accelerating it by, at most, a year. So let them die.

Ford has always been strong and they are still strong today. They are the only Automotive Manufacturer who as said they don't need to pull from a bail out fund. And quite possibly they would never need to pull from a bail out fund. Let the global market place decide their fate.

Chrysler? That's a tough one. I'll be Politically Correct and say I am anti-monopoly. So lets trade money for stock in Chrysler. And put in several senior government representatives (with voting rights) on the Chrysler Board of Directors. It would be an interesting experiment in American Socialism!:lol:
 
The amount of support for pure Socialism in this thread is astounding. I thought things were touchy before, but if people are really advocating Government intervention and control for any industry deemed "too big" to fold or go bankrupt, then I guess we're not that far off from Socialism as I thought we were.

This is actually pretty amazing. So let's go ahead and put together a list of companies or industries that really are untouchable, can't screw up bad enough, and can basically do whatever they want without fear of Market fallout or going out of business.

Banks
Auto companies (big 3)
Managed Health Care companies?
Television/Satellite companies?
Internet Service Providers?
Wal Mart?

Where does it stop?

Equating a government loan to Socialism? That's a huge stretch. :001_rolle
 
The amount of support for pure Socialism in this thread is astounding. I thought things were touchy before, but if people are really advocating Government intervention and control for any industry deemed "too big" to fold or go bankrupt, then I guess we're not that far off from Socialism as I thought we were.

This is actually pretty amazing. So let's go ahead and put together a list of companies or industries that really are untouchable, can't screw up bad enough, and can basically do whatever they want without fear of Market fallout or going out of business.

Banks
Auto companies (big 3)
Managed Health Care companies?
Television/Satellite companies?
Internet Service Providers?
Wal Mart?

Where does it stop?

This isn't really a surprise to you is it? The more Democrats in power the closer we'll get to becoming a true socialist society.

It's really an unfortunate situation. I agree that the government can't just bail everybody out all of the time. If this were just "free" money that the government was taking away from the tax payer to give to any business then I'd be furious, but as it is a loan with rules and stipulations I don't have as big a problem with it.

Fast forward 2 years if Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and the Big Three still flounder and collapse then the government won't have much of a choice to just take the hardline stance and not get involved, IMHO.
 
Don't forget that it was Democratic members of the House of Representatives who turned down the CEO's on Thursday, telling them to come back with a plan to stay viable and concessions from all players.
 
I have no problem with them going under. I also have no problem with anyone driving what vehicle they wish to drive. That being said it is the big three's problem that they went in favor of producing larger "gas guzzlers" and not getting into smaller more efficient cars. Its just like in nature only the strong survive. So let the cream rise...

I hate to think they would get our tax dollars to keep whizzing it away at the tune of 2 billion a month. 25 billion just keeps them going for 2 years, they don't need a bandaid they need an overhaul. Flush out the upper management and get rid of the lazy *** union workers.

Unions have obviously outlived their usefullness. Open up the contracts through bankruptcy protection and get to the heart of the problem, paying people 75K per year to change light bulbs etc, skilled labor my azz.
 
Don't forget that it was Democratic members of the House of Representatives who turned down the CEO's on Thursday, telling them to come back with a plan to stay viable and concessions from all players.

well duh, they have had majority for 2 years now.
 
Don't forget that it was Democratic members of the House of Representatives who turned down the CEO's on Thursday, telling them to come back with a plan to stay viable and concessions from all players.

I have no problem with them going under. I also have no problem with anyone driving what vehicle they wish to drive. That being said it is the big three's problem that they went in favor of producing larger "gas guzzlers" and not getting into smaller more efficient cars. Its just like in nature only the strong survive. So let the cream rise...

I hate to think they would get our tax dollars to keep whizzing it away at the tune of 2 billion a month. 25 billion just keeps them going for 2 years, they don't need a bandaid they need an overhaul. Flush out the upper management and get rid of the lazy *** union workers.

Unions have obviously outlived their usefullness. Open up the contracts through bankruptcy protection and get to the heart of the problem, paying people 75K per year to change light bulbs etc, skilled labor my azz.

well duh, they have had majority for 2 years now.

Let's all play nice. We don't want the Mods to have to intervene. :001_smile
 
The amount of support for pure Socialism in this thread is astounding. I thought things were touchy before, but if people are really advocating Government intervention and control for any industry deemed "too big" to fold or go bankrupt, then I guess we're not that far off from Socialism as I thought we were.

This is actually pretty amazing. So let's go ahead and put together a list of companies or industries that really are untouchable, can't screw up bad enough, and can basically do whatever they want without fear of Market fallout or going out of business.

Banks
Auto companies (big 3)
Managed Health Care companies?
Television/Satellite companies?
Internet Service Providers?
Wal Mart?

Where does it stop?
As stated previously, we don't live in a capitalistic economy. Ours is a mixed economy, where the government has every right to step in to the free market system and impose limits and regulations. Things like mandated minimum wage, and the restriction of monopolies and price-fixing activities. In the case of the wall street bailout, it was the purchase of toxic assets to free up credit liquidity so that commerce wouldn't grind to a complete halt. (What they probably should have done instead was roll out reverse auctions for those assets, which may happen, we'll see.)

In this case however, there's nothing socialistic going on. Both Congress and the auto companies are referring to the funds in question as a bridge loan, something that will have to be paid back to the government w/ interest, just like Chrysler did before. You can't say that a government loan is the same as the government owning all assets, being fully controlled by the state. Suggesting the two are the same is to fall on the argument of the beard fallacy.
(can't have that on a shaving forum now can we?)
I have no problem with them going under. I also have no problem with anyone driving what vehicle they wish to drive. That being said it is the big three's problem that they went in favor of producing larger "gas guzzlers" and not getting into smaller more efficient cars. Its just like in nature only the strong survive. So let the cream rise...

I hate to think they would get our tax dollars to keep whizzing it away at the tune of 2 billion a month. 25 billion just keeps them going for 2 years, they don't need a bandaid they need an overhaul. Flush out the upper management and get rid of the lazy *** union workers.

Unions have obviously outlived their usefullness. Open up the contracts through bankruptcy protection and get to the heart of the problem, paying people 75K per year to change light bulbs etc, skilled labor my azz.
Read the thread plz, this is not even close to being accurate. New line workers are paid $11-14 hourly and receive a meager benefits package. The auto companies have lured as many of the senior workers with higher wage tenure to early retirement w/ buyout packages. The unions and the workers aren't the issue here.
 
Read the thread plz, this is not even close to being accurate. New line workers are paid $11-14 hourly and receive a meager benefits package. The auto companies have lured as many of the senior workers with higher wage tenure to early retirement w/ buyout packages. The unions and the workers aren't the issue here.

I am speaking on personal knowledge, not what his thread claims to know. Unions have commanded a high wage for a long time and if you don't equate past and present poor habits to what is going on you have no reason to question my knowledge. A "friend" of mine was to fat to do a lot of what electricians do at chrysler and he was in the 65-75K range. blah blah whatever.... you and the thread know better:rolleyes:
 
Top Bottom